Canon Announces Development of the EOS R5

Well it seemed as though you weren't signifying the difference between mechanical shutter or electronic shutter, vs "global" or "rolling" (which is a misnomer referring to whether the sensor records everything at once or scans). Did my spec say 1DX3? I can't find a reliable source for that...the source was for the older 1D C (and it says the Sony A7s is 24ms). https://www.cinema5d.c​om/global-vs-rolling-shutter/

It seems your gripes (rolling effects or flicker from artificial light) has to do with not wanting to follow traditional constraints of following certain fps and shutter speed.

davesrose wrote in post #19051156
Well it seemed as though you weren't signifying the difference between mechanical shutter or electronic shutter, vs "global" or "rolling" (which is a misnomer referring to whether the sensor records everything at once or scans). Did my spec say 1DX3? I can't find a reliable source for that...the source was for the older 1D C (and it says the Sony A7s is 24ms). https://www.cinema5d.c​om/global-vs-rolling-shutter/

It seems your gripes (rolling effects or flicker from artificial light) has to do with not wanting to follow traditional constraints of following certain fps and shutter speed.

I understand that rolling shutter occurs with mechanical as well, but it's around the 3ms range

rishi form DPR: https://www.dpreview.c​om/forums/thread/44589​09

I have very high confidence that the GH5/6, and G9 from panasonic are also in the 1Dx3/GH4 category, which is very usable for daily usage and sports, but not best for wildlife, which should have half that to be considered very good/excellent. It's technically feasible that if the R5 does line skipping in stills mode with 4K resolution (not very high) and low rolling shutter, it would be nice to have.

my dream camera would be able to do stills and video with low rolling shutter, and I think the big sensors still lacking in this regard with the exception of the A9, which sucks for video, as it's dumbed down like crazy. It's just so much more pleasant, like the 1Dx iii, to go from stills to video and vice versa with little to no compromises. It doesnt have headline specs anymore, but the usability factor matters MORE IMO. What good is high speed silent shooting if you cant use it in so many scenarios? It's a gripe I have with silent shooting in general, and it's one of my high priority prerequisites with camera purchasing decisions and usage in the field. Really bothersome technical hurdle, because I've been spoiled with the goods of having a truly super silent shutter of the A9.... but I do more video than stills, and the A9 it crap in that regards, workarounds galore.

Note that as your link also highlights: rolling shutter effect is largely dependent on movement (and when it comes to mechanical shutter: it plays a role when its cycle is faster than the scan rate of the sensor). Note also your link is referencing the 1DX3 at the stated 4K 60fps. If we're just speculating on fps, Canon has already released the spec of 120fps at 4K for the R5 (I would assume also a factor that different with 8K because of 4 times the resolution/bandwidth..​.and 4K at a faster read rate would meet your want, and still be a killer feature for most). If you're really concerned about further speed, we can also speculate about whether the R5 would be like Sony and have crop modes (perhaps even the 4K is super-35 frame). But who knows actual read speeds of the sensor, since it isn't out.

Photos or movies: I have not heard complaints from wildlife photographers or cinematographers doing nature documentaries. Stills isn't doing such fast pans or capturing such fast movement (a photo example I've seen of rolling shutter effect is a shadow of a balloon already bursting from an air gun: while the balloon itself hasn't...this on an old Casio 6MP CMOS sensor), and videographers minimize with technique and mount setup (Planet Earth II used RED Epic 6K cameras, Sony A7IIs for lowlight, to even Go Pros for aerial and other shots). In fact when I Google wildlife rolling shutter, it's mainly complaints of Sony A7 users shooting video in e-shutter mode (assume it may be because you can just see the full difference of scan lines throughout a frame if the camera or subject is moving so quickly).

So in short, we can't speculate too much about the R5's performance....and I've noticed on forums there does seem to be more hype about when rolling shutter manifests itself (and whether to blame the camera or start utilizing constraints other videographers/cinemato​graphers have taught for avoiding it).

davesrose wrote in post #19051222
Note that as your link also highlights: rolling shutter effect is largely dependent on movement (and when it comes to mechanical shutter: it plays a role when its cycle is faster than the scan rate of the sensor). Note also your link is referencing the 1DX3 at the stated 4K 60fps. If we're just speculating on fps, Canon has already released the spec of 120fps at 4K for the R5 (I would assume also a factor that different with 8K because of 4 times the resolution/bandwidth..​.and 4K at a faster read rate would meet your want, and still be a killer feature for most). If you're really concerned about further speed, we can also speculate about whether the R5 would be like Sony and have crop modes (perhaps even the 4K is super-35 frame). But who knows actual read speeds of the sensor, since it isn't out.

Photos or movies: I have not heard complaints from wildlife photographers or cinematographers doing nature documentaries. Stills isn't doing such fast pans or capturing such fast movement (a photo example I've seen of rolling shutter effect is a shadow of a balloon already bursting from an air gun: while the balloon itself hasn't...this on an old Casio 6MP CMOS sensor), and videographers minimize with technique and mount setup (Planet Earth II used RED Epic 6K cameras, Sony A7IIs for lowlight, to even Go Pros for aerial and other shots). In fact when I Google wildlife rolling shutter, it's mainly complaints of Sony A7 users shooting video in e-shutter mode (assume it may be because you can just see the full difference of scan lines throughout a frame if the camera or subject is moving so quickly).

So in short, we can't speculate too much about the R5's performance....and I've noticed on forums there does seem to be more hype about when rolling shutter manifests itself (and whether to blame the camera or start utilizing constraints other videographers/cinemato​graphers have taught for avoiding it).

I speculate that the 1Dxiii does 6K internally and downsamples to 4K, so the camera can do not only 8mp @ 60fps, but also the full 20mp @ 60fps. Jared polin has some sports samples, and the rolling effect is not noticeable, hence my conclusion, but if anyone has that camera, shoot into some LED lights with known frequencies, you can figure it out easily.

has there ever been a camera with low framerate and fast readout (other than the A9)? the silent shutter tends to get worse rather than better (supposely the A7Riv has an appalling 1/15 E shutter), making that E-shutter rather useless. Videographers can get by the issue, as I really dont see rolling shutter a big deal with video because there's so much motion going on, but with stills, it's a huge problem.

I'm not sure how the 1DX3 samples video, but it doesn't have the horizontal pixels for full 6K (as I recall, 4K video is 1.7 crop factor on it). Its full 3:2 size probably has a different readout speed (even if it's minute). If you look at recommended shutter speeds for 60HZ light, you can even use any shutter speed at 24fps. https://www.red.com/fl​icker-free-video

RED also has pages devoted to rolling shutter with video and techniques for reducing rolling effects. There's also going to be some different characteristics with cinema cameras using a disc shutter (so also shutter "speed" becomes "angle"). A lot of these techniques also apply with stills (even though, as already noted, cinema cameras have had a faster readout speed and mechanical shutter). It's also dependent on whether you're using an E-shutter vs mechanical (most examples I see of E-shutter lag is fast panning shots like with motorsports)...https://www.red.com …01/global-rolling-shutter

John Sheehy wrote in post #19051155
The original 4MP 1D had a Panasonic CCD that had a global shutter, at least up to 1/500, IIRC.

And you said in another thread it couldn't be done

Capn Jack wrote in post #19051305
And you said in another thread it couldn't be done

I don't think so.

The 1D has a CCD. CCD technology as used in consumer cameras allowed global shutters, and it was used. I have CCD P&S cameras that can sync flash at 1/1600.

What I did say is that there seems to be something preventing manufacturers of consumer cameras giving global shutters on current CMOS sensors, to which you gave links to sensors that weren't for consumer CMOS cameras. Based on that, I would not suddenly expect global shutters to appear in our consumer cameras as the obvious next step. What people who know a lot about sensor design have said is that global shutters with CMOS is hard to do without a lot of noise. I don't personally think that this should mean no such cameras at all; there is certainly room for cameras that are only good with very high exposure, such as one that can use fill flash from a single consumer flash unit in the sunlight with a very fast sync, but manufacturers of consumer cameras have little or no precedent of making corner-specialist cameras in recent years.

Look at the Sony A9 sensor - it doesn't have a global shutter, but it has an electronic shutter that is much faster than most other CMOS cameras. The character of read noise is pretty poor with that camera. It is one of the noisiest recent FF sensors in low ISO shadows.

John Sheehy wrote in post #19051620
I don't think so.

The 1D has a CCD. CCD technology as used in consumer cameras allowed global shutters, and it was used. I have CCD P&S cameras that can sync flash at 1/1600.

What I did say is that there seems to be something preventing manufacturers of consumer cameras giving global shutters on current CMOS sensors, to which you gave links to sensors that weren't for consumer CMOS cameras.

I did give a link to a Huawei cell phone, which is certainly a consumer CMOS camera

John Sheehy wrote in post #19051620
Based on that, I would not suddenly expect global shutters to appear in our consumer cameras as the obvious next step. What people who know a lot about sensor design have said is that global shutters with CMOS is hard to do without a lot of noise. I don't personally think that this should mean no such cameras at all; there is certainly room for cameras that are only good with very high exposure, such as one that can use fill flash from a single consumer flash unit in the sunlight with a very fast sync, but manufacturers of consumer cameras have little or no precedent of making corner-specialist cameras in recent years.

Look at the Sony A9 sensor - it doesn't have a global shutter, but it has an electronic shutter that is much faster than most other CMOS cameras. The character of read noise is pretty poor with that camera. It is one of the noisiest recent FF sensors in low ISO shadows.

I thought the 1D was a CCD, thank you for confirming it. But I don't see the point of comparing a CCD to the EOS R5, since I suspect the R5 will have a CMOS sensor.

Capn Jack wrote in post #19051879
I did give a link to a Huawei cell phone, which is certainly a consumer CMOS camera

Yes, but it is not the type of camera being discussed in context, which was upcoming FF cameras.

It was an example of past global shutters, an example that I was well aware of global shutters being a possibility, when you seemed to suggest that I didn't allow that possibility at all.

John Sheehy wrote in post #19052088
Yes, but it is not the type of camera being discussed in context, which was upcoming FF cameras.

It was an example of past global shutters, an example that I was well aware of global shutters being a possibility, when you seemed to suggest that I didn't allow that possibility at all.

John- here is what you posted before, before I made the comment, it wasn't in response to me at all.

John Sheehy wrote in post #19051155
The original 4MP 1D had a Panasonic CCD that had a global shutter, at least up to 1/500, IIRC.

I merely replied to that statement.

As for the Huawei camera, it is at least as much in context here as a CCD camera since it is a CMOS camera with a global shutter.

Getting things back on track,
Hopefully, they'll use this technology in the R5:
https://global.canon/e​n/news/2016/20160831.h​tml

Anyone hoping for no Blackout to go along with high Mpix and FPS

No, blackout please (instead of the R's shutter stutter)

Choderboy wrote in post #19052475
No, blackout please (instead of the R's shutter stutter)

Yes, "blackout during exposure" rather than "last image during exposure."

Capn Jack wrote in post #19052339
John- here is what you posted before, before I made the comment, it wasn't in response to me at all.

I merely replied to that statement.

... there was another exchange in-between. You accused me of having previously said that what I said that the 1D does couldn't be done, which isn't true. What I have actually said in the past that was that I wouldn't expect global shutters to just suddenly appear in the next Canon bodies, in an R-oriented discussion.

It's not going to show up in an R body (although it would be tempting if it did). Smaller sensors have less heat issues regarding noise.

Getting things back on track,
Hopefully, they'll use this technology in the R5:
https://global.canon/e​n/news/2016/20160831.h​tml

That would be nice, but there is often quite a lag between prototypes of new technology and implementation in consumer products. I'd rather consider it a potential surprise than a level of expectation. I have come to expect little in the short term.

Choderboy wrote in post #19052475
No, blackout please (instead of the R's shutter stutter)

Yeah; I don't know why anyone would want to have EVF lag extended by a sustained frame. We humans are perfectly adept at gauging timing and location with blackout. We had to evolve to track predators and prey as we or they ran past trees or boulders that periodically blocked our vision. The brain surely does better filling in the blanks, than using static, redundant old information.